At one point, he said, the city offered $10,000, and later $25,000, which Howell considered far too low for what he called an "unseen injury" involving damage to Bradford's future by giving him an arrest record.

Bradford said he plans to spend some of his award money on a new van to transport the kids at the Rainier Vista Boys and Girls Club, where he works. He also plans to attend community college once he acquires his GED certificate.

As for the city, the bills haven't been tallied yet, but here are some of the known and estimated costs the city faces:

$94,000 incurred by Stafford Frey, the city's legal team, for trial preparation and settlement discussion, according to the City Attorney's Office. Howell estimated that the total expense of the city's defense, when trial bills accrue, will double that amount to $190,000.

The costs of Bradford's legal case, estimated in the "six figures," by Howell, who said he couldn't provide an exact figure because he hasn't added all the bills from other lawyers who assisted him. The city must pay Bradford's fees because a violation of civil rights requires it.

If the city appeals the case -- which is being considered -- it would face more attorney expenses, perhaps considerably more. If it loses the appeal, Howell warned, the city will owe Bradford his judgment plus interest, and it will have to pay the costs of Bradford's side of the appeal.

Howell said he would have been willing during mediation before trial to settle for as low as $150,000, though he had hoped to get $250,000.

Anne Bremner, a partner at Stafford Frey, indicated that there was more to the mediation story than Howell revealed, but declined to elucidate, saying mediation details are supposed to be kept confidential.

The city also faces other federal lawsuits in which plaintiffs claim they were, like Bradford, harmed in some way during arrest.

The Bradford episode could have easily been avoided with better training and supervision, jurors told the Seattle P-I after the trial. Bradford was supervising the end of a Boys and Girls Club dance in August 2006 when he and his volunteer sought police help to keep an unruly crowd in check on the streets outside, many of them not associated with the club.

When Officer Jacob Briskey arrived, he saw Bradford jogging by, and yelled at him to stop. Bradford testified that he did not know Briskey was yelling at him, until just before he was slammed to the ground. Then he was pressed onto the hood of the car and handcuffed with a wrenching move.

With approval of a sergeant, Bradford was booked and jailed overnight for obstructing and resisting arrest, though the city never prosecuted him. A major part of Bradford's damages claim was that the young man -- who was statewide youth of the year for Boys and Girls Clubs in 2003 -- will be forever tainted by having been arrested.

Mayor Greg Nickels, in an e-mail to the P-I Tuesday, declined to be interviewed, and remained relatively neutral about the jury's verdict: "While the city attorney considers whether to file an appeal in this case, we remain confident that the Police Department's long record of successfully defending against such lawsuits underscores its training and professionalism."

City Attorney Tom Carr also declined an interview and issued a written statement: "This is a very unfortunate case involving a brief event ... two years ago. Police officers routinely have to make critical decisions instantly under stressful conditions. This is the first verdict of this kind involving the Seattle Police Department in over 10 years, which speaks to the excellent job done by our police force."

Chief Gil Kerlikowske did not respond to an interview request, after being asked to comment on, among other things, a suggestion made by the jurors that the Police Department open an internal investigation of the Bradford episode, something that has never been done.

Bremner and Moses Garcia, the Stafford Frey attorney who defended the city against Bradford, spoke for the officers, saying they acted in "good faith." A U.S. Supreme Court precedent should have rendered them immune from a jury trial, a point that could be raised in appeal, they said.

But Howell said he can't see grounds for appeal. He described another U.S. Supreme Court decision that says that "when an officer without reasonable suspicion or probable cause approaches a person, the individual has a right to ignore the police officer and go about his business."

A P-I investigative series published two months ago titled "Strong Arm of the Law" dealt with Seattle police misuse of the obstruction arrest, and with the city's almost exclusive reliance on the Stafford Frey firm to defend officers against misconduct lawsuits. The P-I found that blacks are arrested for obstruction at a rate eight times that of whites, and half of all obstruction cases are dropped when it is the primary charge.

The city has used the Stafford Frey firm almost exclusively for four decades in an ongoing contract that has never been put out to bid. City officials argued that the firm is successful, and relatively economical, though their bills exceeded $6.3 million in a five-year period beginning in 2002.

Howell said the Police Department's relationship with Stafford Frey has become "incestuous." Stafford Frey attorneys arrive at scenes where citizens have been injured, or even killed, almost before the aid cars arrive, "telling (the involved officers) what to write or how to make statements," he said.

The result is a failure to properly discipline the force, Howell said, adding that officers ought to be compelled to make "candid statements" after an incident, rather than be coached.

Finally, he criticized what he calls the city's "scorched earth" manner of defending against police misconduct complaints; spending millions on attorneys to bat away the complaints, rather than paying out reasonable settlements to legitimate complainants and punishing offending officers. The practice backfired in the Bradford case, he said.

Bremner wasn't available Tuesday night to comment on Howell's observation, but in the past, she has defended the arrangement with her law firm as the best for the city and the officers because of the effectiveness of the lawyers.

The mayor reiterated Tuesday a promise for a study to track obstruction arrests by the Police Department's civilian auditor, which was first made after the P-I series ran.

"We have asked Office of Professional Accountability Auditor Kate Pflaumer to examine issues raised when police arrest suspects on charges of obstruction, and this will be included in her next report in November," Nickels said in an e-mail to the P-I relayed by his spokesman.